There's no doubt in my mind that people right when they say Sutter is a downgrade from Staal... but Sutter is exactly what the Pens need for a 3rd line center. It was great having Staal, but I'll take Sutter at 1/3 the cap hit any day of the week.

Sutter has better hands than Staal, and it looks like better speed as well. Staal is a beast, and if you're starting a team from scratch, you undoubtedly pick him ahead of Sutter. But Sutter is a much better fit for this team.

the better player is the better fit for this team. every GM would rather have staal than sutter.

but sutter will still be a good fit, of course

Don't necessarily agree with this. Stall is the better player obviously, but at the end of last yeat he was concentrating on bettering his offense (to make himself more attractive ar free agent time) and his D suffered. Allthings being equal Stall is your man. But all things were not equal in that Stall wanted out and you don't want a guy who wants out on your team. Stall would have been unhappy on the '13 Pens, and Sutter seems happy. You want tha happy guy.

There's no doubt in my mind that people right when they say Sutter is a downgrade from Staal... but Sutter is exactly what the Pens need for a 3rd line center. It was great having Staal, but I'll take Sutter at 1/3 the cap hit any day of the week.

Sutter has better hands than Staal, and it looks like better speed as well. Staal is a beast, and if you're starting a team from scratch, you undoubtedly pick him ahead of Sutter. But Sutter is a much better fit for this team.

the better player is the better fit for this team. every GM would rather have staal than sutter.

but sutter will still be a good fit, of course

Don't necessarily agree with this. Stall is the better player obviously, but at the end of last yeat he was concentrating on bettering his offense (to make himself more attractive ar free agent time) and his D suffered. Allthings being equal Stall is your man. But all things were not equal in that Stall wanted out and you don't want a guy who wants out on your team. Stall would have been unhappy on the '13 Pens, and Sutter seems happy. You want tha happy guy.

BEPF

i dont agree or disagree just saying Staal carried more of a defensive weight than people seem to realize. He carried a ton of minutes beyond a typical player in his "role". He added amazing depth to a team that seamed to lose a top line player every week.

While I like Sutter a lot, and think he will be a decent addition. He will not be able to carry the load of that many tough minutes against tough competition as well as be an VERY above average top line fill in.

Also, this goes for all players. Can we stop putting so much stock into last nights scrimmage. It was fun to see but half the players on the ice are minor leaguers. It showed some flashes of what guys are capable of but that is about it.

I guess every GM would rather have Staal than Sutter, but none would be comparing the two. If they had a third line center role to fill and could plug one of their contracts in there, i'm not sure that every GM takes Staal.

Idoit40fans wrote:I guess every GM would rather have Staal than Sutter, but none would be comparing the two. If they had a third line center role to fill and could plug one of their contracts in there, i'm not sure that every GM takes Staal.

I just dont really get this though. A GM might not pick the better scorerer, Selke candidate and consesus best 3rd line center in the league because he thinks he is too good to be a 3rd line center - which he is, but still.

Staal much better than Sutter. Period. In any role.

He carried a heavier workload than people want to admit right now.

edit - I missed the part about the contracts. Still I just think everyone is understating what Staal brought to the table.

Idoit40fans wrote:I guess every GM would rather have Staal than Sutter, but none would be comparing the two. If they had a third line center role to fill and could plug one of their contracts in there, i'm not sure that every GM takes Staal.

I just dont really get this though. A GM might not pick the better scorerer, Selke candidate and consesus best 3rd line center in the league because he thinks he is too good to be a 3rd line center - which he is, but still.

Staal much better than Sutter. Period. In any role.

He carried a heavier workload than people want to admit right now.

edit - I missed the part about the contracts. Still I just think everyone is understating what Staal brought to the table.

the original premise was in a vacuum. contracts weren't a part of the discussion. not surprised that idoit felt the need to chime in by needlessly picking apart technicalities.

MRandall25 wrote:And I think you're underestimating what Sutter can bring to the table.

No way, I like Sutter. But we can have this conversation again if Crosby or Malkin go down and your second line isTangradi Sutter Dupuis.

You can't account for injuries to certain players. It just so happens that we; unfortunately, have a history of either Malkin or Crosby missing significant time. Any team becomes weaker when losing one of your top 2 centers, even more when those 2 centers are top players in all of hockey. Making signings based on what would happen if we lose player x is bad imo.

If we really want to boil this down to the root, it becomes out of Crosby, Malkin, Staal, and Letang, who would be the odd man out? I would say it's fair to assume that we wouldn't be able to keep all 4 (where Staal and Letang are both due raises) while maintaining a balanced roster that can compete for a cup.

Last edited by Beveridge on Thu Jan 17, 2013 2:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I stand by my statement that Sutter is a better fit for this team. A first/second line center playing on the third line is not a good fit. A player with the legitimate salary demands of Staal is not a good fit - in fact signing Staal could have meant losing Letang or Malkin down the road.

Tico Rick wrote:I stand by my statement that Sutter is a better fit for this team. A first/second line center playing on the third line is not a good fit. A player with the legitimate salary demands of Staal is not a good fit - in fact signing Staal could have meant losing Letang or Malkin down the road.

staal, financially, is a poor fit for this team. i wouldn't want him on the roster for 6 mill a year. give me sutter and his 2+ million any day. but to say that staal hasn't been a good fit on the 3rd line...come on.

MRandall25 wrote:And I think you're underestimating what Sutter can bring to the table.

No way, I like Sutter. But we can have this conversation again if Crosby or Malkin go down and your second line isTangradi Sutter Dupuis.

You can't account for injuries to certain players. It just so happens that we; unfortunately, have a history of either Malkin or Crosby missing significant time. Any team becomes weaker when losing one of your top 2 centers, even more when those 2 centers are top players in all of hockey. Making signings based on what would happen if we lose player x is bad imo.

If we really want to boil this down to the root, it becomes out of Crosby, Malkin, Staal, and Letang, who would be the odd man out? I would say it's fair to assume that we wouldn't be able to keep all 4 (where Staal and Letang are both due raises) while maintaining a balanced roster that can compete for a cup.

So depth doesn't play into the role of the original conversation now that we have moved it to "every possible scenario, like the cap, why sutter is a better fit" instead of the orignal point: we are a worse team overall with sutter instead of Staal, especially since its the NHL and we know injuries are such a big part of the game?

Tico Rick wrote:I stand by my statement that Sutter is a better fit for this team. A first/second line center playing on the third line is not a good fit. A player with the legitimate salary demands of Staal is not a good fit - in fact signing Staal could have meant losing Letang or Malkin down the road.

staal, financially, is a poor fit for this team. i wouldn't want him on the roster for 6 mill a year. give me sutter and his 2+ million any day. but to say that staal hasn't been a good fit on the 3rd line...come on.

Tico Rick wrote:I stand by my statement that Sutter is a better fit for this team. A first/second line center playing on the third line is not a good fit. A player with the legitimate salary demands of Staal is not a good fit - in fact signing Staal could have meant losing Letang or Malkin down the road.

staal, financially, is a poor fit for this team. i wouldn't want him on the roster for 6 mill a year. give me sutter and his 2+ million any day. but to say that staal hasn't been a good fit on the 3rd line...come on.

Come on, yourself. I didn't say anything about how well Staal fit in on the team in the past, so don't put words in my mouth. You are the one who made this blanket statement:

the better player is the better fit for this team. every GM would rather have staal than sutter.

Staal is the better player, but he is not the better fit for this team. And clearly, one GM preferred having Sutter to Staal. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to argue here.

Tico Rick wrote:I stand by my statement that Sutter is a better fit for this team. A first/second line center playing on the third line is not a good fit. A player with the legitimate salary demands of Staal is not a good fit - in fact signing Staal could have meant losing Letang or Malkin down the road.

staal, financially, is a poor fit for this team. i wouldn't want him on the roster for 6 mill a year. give me sutter and his 2+ million any day. but to say that staal hasn't been a good fit on the 3rd line...come on.

Come on, yourself. I didn't say anything about how well Staal fit in on the team in the past, so don't put words in my mouth. You are the one who made this blanket statement:

so you're saying one of three things:

1) staal fit in on the 3rd line in the past, but not this year2) staal never fit in on the 3rd line - this year or in past years 3) you're bringing in his current contract as a factor

if it's #3, then we agree. too expensive to "fit in". but if it's #1 or #2, then i'm interested in hearing more, because that's nutso.

Tico Rick wrote:I stand by my statement that Sutter is a better fit for this team. A first/second line center playing on the third line is not a good fit. A player with the legitimate salary demands of Staal is not a good fit - in fact signing Staal could have meant losing Letang or Malkin down the road.

staal, financially, is a poor fit for this team. i wouldn't want him on the roster for 6 mill a year. give me sutter and his 2+ million any day. but to say that staal hasn't been a good fit on the 3rd line...come on.

Come on, yourself. I didn't say anything about how well Staal fit in on the team in the past, so don't put words in my mouth. You are the one who made this blanket statement:

so you're saying one of three things:

1) staal fit in on the 3rd line in the past, but not this year2) staal never fit in on the 3rd line - this year or in past years 3) you're bringing in his current contract as a factor

if it's #3, then we agree. too expensive to "fit in". but if it's #1 or #2, then i'm interested in hearing more, because that's nutso.

1) staal fit in on the 3rd line in the past, but not this year2) staal never fit in on the 3rd line - this year or in past years 3) you're bringing in his current contract as a factor

if it's #3, then we agree. too expensive to "fit in". but if it's #1 or #2, then i'm interested in hearing more, because that's nutso.

I'd suggest both #1 and #3 are valid arguments. Staal was no longer content to play a #3 center roll, making keeping him in that position ill-advised. Sutter is a better "fit" at this stage of their respective careers.